Instance Names

[roseda]

Does anyone know if it possible to force Catia V5 to make the instance name the same as the Part Number?

 

[solid7]

Sure.

If you want the instances in the assembly to be named the same as the part, rename the top level part name in the tree, (in the *detail* model) BEFORE you start building. This will then cause each instance to take the name you've given, plus a .1, .2, etc., for each instance that's used.

Otherwise, you just need to rename the instances. (if they're already created) Do this with right click, "properties".




**************
Check out CATBlog!

 

[roseda]

Thanks for that.

The way that I like to design is to give all parts a short name at the scheme stage, then when I start detailing, I give them a part number and a full name and save it into another directory.

It would be nice if you could just change the part name and the instance name updated to match it - I can't think of a scenario where you would want different names.

Also, because our part names are quite long, having both the part name and instance name displayed in the tree covers over half the screen. Therefore, I just show the instance name. The problem with this is that most users are not courteous enough to change their instance names to match the part name and so the tree becomes meaningless.

 

[solid7]

It would be nice if you could just change the part name and the instance name updated to match it - I can't think of a scenario where you would want different names.

Really? You can't think of any scenario?

Remember, that Catia is a collaboration suite, geared toward the major industries, AND their respective suppliers. Too many times, designers tend to think that Catia is JUST a CAD system, and it's there solely to make the job of designing easier. (of course, that's simply not the case) Having that in mind, let me assure you that there are PLENTY of scenarios where it's not only nice, but necessary to have instances differ from part names.

For instance, a supplier uses a standard part. It has a manufacturer name. Then for a part name, the supplier is required to follow a procedure, in many companies relating to supplier identification. He/She MUST include a CAGE code on EVERY part number. So, if the supplier purchases a part, that's standard, off the shelf item, but has to number it with their OWN cage code, should he/she be required to save a new model, under a new part name, for the SAME file, every single time they use that part? Or, if I have a part in my system, that I use over and over to MANY different suppliers, should I have to save a new model, under a new name, every time I use it? Maybe you think so, but being a supplier to suppliers, I much prefer the logic built into the instance naming.




**************
Check out CATBlog!

 

[catiajim]

Another scenario is in the Electrical arena. While each part has a part number, each instance of that part carries a different Elecrical Reference Designator.

 

[l3ob]

I suggest that you write a macro to accomplish this on the products. We've done that for our fastener sub-products so as the fasteners are changed out or resized during the evolution of the assy, we can keep the instance name and count of that type up to date at each location. The macro was rather simple; it renames and counts the types for the '.1, .2, .3' and so on at the end of the name. Just be sure that everything under the product needs the instance and name to match.